In an unannounced trip to Iraq, a country that has seen horrific war and terrorism over the last decade, Secretary of Defense General James Mattis was making a statement.

“You see, ISIS is now caught in-between converging forces. So ISIS’s days are certainly numbered, but it’s not over yet and it’s not going to be over any time soon.”

“An enemy that hides behind women and children are showing who are the people violating every standard of decency and fills us with conviction [for] what we have to do about this enemy.”

“I’ve seen people fleeing to ISF (Iraqi security forces) and feeling safe when they get to them. That alone is more telling than anything there, you see people risking their lives getting from one side to another. We are the good guys and the innocent people in the battlefield know the difference.”

Mattis named the fight:

“ISIS’s last stand.”

I’m reminded of Braveheart. Imagine Mattis in fur, riding from the fire atop a stallion. Idyllic.

Call me old fashioned, call me a war hawk, but I rather like the idea of America kicking ass and taking names, being feared by enemies. It’s also refreshing to hear our military leaders taking pleasure in America being the best. I enjoy military leaders flexing their military might. I delight in Mattis delighting in American Military Supremacy. Yes, I capitalized that for no reason but to emphasis a point. Which I realize isn’t allowed in grammatically correct circles. Tuff toenails.

ISIS should run, cower, and pee their pants at the thought of the American military and its leaders. Welcome to the new era, dessert scum.

t has been an interesting couple of weeks to say the least. The collusion being endlessly touted by the progressive/socialists and the media between the Trump administration and the Russians has been blown out of the water. CNN, NBC, ABC, and the New York Times are all showing righteous indignation about the collusion that never was. Yet they are unsurprisingly quiet about the information that Nunes may have. They will be vocal about how he got the information, in the hope to drown out what that information may say.

In the lead is Rep. Adam Schiff, a Democrat that shills from California and ranking member of the House Intelligence committee. He declared to all that there Circumstantial evidence of collusion and direct evidence of deception. After the release of the papers that Rep. Nunes was given, Schiff now says there is no definitive proof. Of course, the media played tape constantly of Schiff in the beginning, but have strangely gone silent now. Even members of the entire Intelligence committee have said that they doubt they will find a smoking gun. Perhaps that is because there isn’t one.

The White House invited members of both the House and Senate Intelligence Committees to view the documents. There has been no word from Congressman shill Adam Schiff on whether it was the “more than circumstantial evidence” that he claimed to have.

And then there is Evelyn Farkas, a former member of the Obama administration and a Clinton campaign adviser who admitted to urging the Obama administration to gather intelligence on the Trump administration it could find. It appears that the past administration had already started before this, but this is just another example out in the open of the crimes committed by the Obama administration. In her own words-

“I was urging my former colleagues and, frankly speaking, the people on the Hill, to get as much information as you can, before President Obama leaves office, Because I had a fear that somehow that information would disappear with the senior Obama people who left so it would be hidden away. That the Trump folks-if they found out how we knew what we knew about the Trump staff dealing with the Russians they would try to compromise these sources and methods”

Now why would someone such as Ms. Farkas, who was no longer in government have any information pertaining to intelligence gathering, and have the ability to send such a message to those in intelligence communities and those on “the Hill”?

The how is simple. After Hillary left the State Department, Hillary and six of her aides retained their access to secure materials. Using those credentials and working with those in the Deep State can not only help to attempt to undermine the Trump administration but the integrity of the electoral process as well. Talk of collusion between the Trump administration and the Russians will be forced on the American people for as long as possible. It will used to bludgeon the American people into believing that the Trump administration is illegitimate, and that the progressive/socialist Democrats did not deserve to be thrown out of office as they were.

“Russiagate” as some are calling it will be under investigation for years with no clear answer and no honest facts. The left will use it to attempt to put a cloud over any legislation that the Trump administration attempts, and instead, be forced to explain the false scandals that the mainstream media and Democrats bring up from time to time. They know they can’t win on the facts, so innuendo and smears are all they have. They can not win on policy and so they continue to push a false narrative in the hopes that someone other than their rabid followers will listen. If not, they can use it to rabble rouse the followers they do have in the chaotic and violent confrontation that they will make all the more prevalent.

Rolling Stone, certainly no far right publication and Matt Taibbi have a column describing theis Russia-Trump collusion story as mass hysteria. Going as far as to declare the Attorney General Jeff Sessions is a Russian partisan, Glenn Greenwald is a Russian Shill, and there are Russian moles amongst the FBI agents in New York. Media Matters Eric Boehlert wants to know what type of information the Russians have on Republican Intelligence Chair Devin Nunes. Even reporters are not immune. Matt McDermott, a pollster in the pocket of Democrats wants to know why reporters such as Michael Tracy and Zaid Jilani are not following the theme of the Progressive/socialist agenda.

Has journalism become so bad that if you disagree with the talking points of the progressive/socialists that you will be outed as a possible Russian agent. Will we continue to be accused as being Putin agents as 200 websites were by the Washington Post? Do they really think that one of their candidates standing in front of a crowd and declaring that the intelligence agencies have declared that his opponent is a Putin puppet will win elections?

Paul Manafort, a Trump associate and chair of the Trump campaign for a few months is still being vilified in the press even though the Trump campaign forced him out after allegations of corruption while working with the Ukraine former president Viktor Yanukovych. Removed well before the election and no part of the administration, the progressive/socialists continue to make Paul Manafort a story in the attempt to smear Trump. The fact that the allegations were from a time before Trump had him as a campaign manager doesn’t matter. There are those at the mainstream media that will declare this is proof of collusion.

The main theme of this Russian collusion story was started by a company called “Crowdstrike”. It was this company that the Democrat Party paid for and relied on for information related to the Russian-Trump collusion debacle that we are now engulfed in. Crowdstrike, tied to the Atlantic Council, a think tank funded by George Soros has accepted money in the past for favored policy positions based on promoting disinformation and propaganda. Even the New York Times has named the Atlantic Council as a group that take money from foreign interests to support various agenda around the world. The AP reported that the Atlantic Council has received funding from the Ploughshares Fund another Soros funded organization. Along with the company “Crowdstrike” the Atlantic Council has constantly and consistently claimed that Russia was responsible for hacking the 2016 election.

It was Crowdstrike that did the forensics on the DNC hacked computers, while the FBI was refused access to them. Former CIA Director Michael Morell, James Clapper, and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence have all stated that that is not and never has been any evidence of Russian hacking. Once again, the Democrats will continue to push a false narrative to attempt to bend the American people to an agenda that will only continue to get worse. The continued false claims, innuendo, and false attributions will only continue, and more and more of our citizens will see the left for what it is. An group of agitators using Alinsky tactics in the attempt to destroy the opposition by vilifying all those who disagree with the agenda that have laid out. There are no facts, debate points, of what is for the good of the American people, it is an agenda of pure, raw power that they seek.

Unless you have been off the grid or in a coma for the last year or so, I’m sure you know the story of Comey’s involvement in the investigation of Hillary Clinton’s private email server, as well as the investigation into Trump’s supposed collaboration with the Russian government. In fact, I have even written previously about the FBI investigation’s potential impact on the election in my article:

Then last week, Hillary Clinton made the comment at a speaking engagement that if the election had been on October 27th (the day before Comey notified Congress that the investigation into Clinton was being re-opened), that she had no doubt that she would be President. Interestingly, she made no mention of the fact that she was quite possibly the worst, most corrupt Presidential candidate in the history of the United States.

Throughout the years that I have been interested in and aware of politics, I cannot remember another time when the public’s opinion of a key figure flip-flopped so many times.

Comey began investigating Clinton and her illegal use of a private email server: Democrats Hate him – Republicans love him.

Whether you agreed with his actions or not, I hope you will at least agree that he was in a difficult position. If I had his job, I probably would have resigned long before now, and I definitely would have begged my doctor for a Xanax prescription. When Comey first became a household name, at the beginning of the Clinton investigation, I remember several news anchors describing him, since most of us were barely even aware of who he was at that point.

I recall him being described as strict, by the book, and not afraid of stepping on toes. It was said that he was possibly the most qualified person in the country to hold the FBI Director title, since he refused to allow party affiliation to ever come into play in investigations. One comical host even joked that Comey was such a hard-ass, that he would investigate his own mother if he thought she might have broken the law.

This opinion however, did not last long. It took almost no time before people began spewing their hatred for the man, only because he appeared to possibly be reaching a conclusion that could hurt their preferred Presidential candidate. I have always heard that if you have enemies, it means you once stood up for something you believed. So I would say that in Comey’s case, since most of the country hated him at one point, he was probably the best man for the job – a job that he now lost due to that un-wavering commitment to finding the truth.

I must say that I find it ironic how the Democrat’s opinion of Comey changed so quickly. Just last week, they were essentially blaming him for Clinton’s loss. Now, however, Trump has fired him, so the Democrats in their standard post-election fashion, must oppose the decision. Suddenly I quit hearing how Comey was to blame for the loss. This blame was quickly replaced by cries that Comey must have been close to uncovering something in the investigation into Russian involvement, which surely would have guaranteed an impeachment of Trump.

It’s all just the same rhetoric being spewed over and over again by the left. At this point, there really is no reason for them to even go to the trouble of opposing each individual action Trump takes or doesn’t take. We get it, liberals hate Trump, even though most of them don’t even know why. They might as well just issue one “blanket opposition” to every single thing Trump says and does for the remainder of his presidency. Then Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer and Elizabeth Warren can go back to their Bingo game at the nursing home and leave “running the country” to those of us not caught up in blind hatred for our opposition.

So do I agree with Trump’s decision to terminate Comey? Based only on the information I currently have, no, I do not. I don’t think it was the right decision, at least not currently. But it was inevitable that it would eventually happen. Comey was way too involved in the election to escape without a scratch, even though I believe the actions he took were mostly with the right intentions. I think Comey genuinely wanted to make sure everyone knew the truth, so the right person could win the election. I don’t believe that desire was due to any personal bias toward or against either candidate, but rather a desire for everyone to know the truth, whatever it might be.

Unfortunately for Comey, and as we saw with the liberals’ reaction to the Wikileaks document dumps, Democrats believe that anyone who uncovers evidence of their corruption is guilty of trying to influence the outcome of the election. I’m sorry, but if the truth is so damaging to you, perhaps you need to look at why you have chosen to oppose it.